What happened? The defence of Bakhmut is a strategically correct operation of Ukrainian troops, despite the concentration of significant forces and means to deter the aggressor in this relatively insignificant operational area.
Source. The latest report of the American Institute for the Study of War (ISW).
Details. U.S. analysts believe that although Ukraine has concentrated a lot of troops on the defence of Bakhmut, which could be used for counteroffensive operations in other parts of the front, it would pay a much higher price if it allowed russian forces to easily take Bakhmut.
"Bakhmut itself is not operationally or strategically significant but had russian troops taken it relatively rapidly and cheaply they could have hoped to expand operations in ways that could have forced Ukraine to construct hasty defensive positions in less favorable terrain," the report says.
The ISW urges not to dismiss the seemingly "political" calculus in the defence of Bakhmut.
"Russian forces occupy more than 100,000 square kilometers of Ukrainian territory including multiple Ukrainian cities and are inflicting atrocities on Ukrainian civilians in occupied areas. It is not unreasonable for political and military leaders to weigh these factors in determining whether to hold or cede particular population concentrations," the report notes.
The American institute also notes that Ukrainian forces have previously used a similar model of gradual depletion of the russians, which is why, in pursuit of minor tactical successes, their offensive stopped after months of heavy losses of personnel and equipment.